A former student recently interviewed me on the use of algorithms in social networks. He was doing a research project for another journalism professor. Weren’t these algorithms leading to the spread of disinformation in the news? he asked.
Yes, the algorithms had allowed for the rapid spread of hoaxes and conspiracy theories related to covid-19. But I had the impression from his questions that an algorithm for him was just a machine that functioned apart from human intervention.
Also: The typology of hoaxes about covid-19 (Spanish)
So I gave my former student a long discourse (he became visibly impatient on the Zoom screen) about my experience a century ago writing programs in the computer languages Basic, Fortran, and Snobol.
All of which professorial blah blah blah was to make the point that computers do only what humans tell them to do.
In social media, it’s all about profits
The social networks–YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, and the rest–are businesses that make their money from your attention, I told him.
So their programmers write algorithms designed to deliver content that keeps you engaged for as long as possible, sharing it as much as possible, and interacting with it (clicks, likes, responding to polls, signing up for services, etc.) as much as possible.
What keeps people engaged? Not boring policy platforms of political candidates. People are drawn to sensationalism and content that provokes strong emotions of humor, anxiety, fear, suspicion, and hate. Clickbait, in other words.
Bad journalism has always been a lucrative business. By contrast, good journalism takes time and is costly to produce.
All of this engagement and activity on our part delivers value to the advertisers on these platforms. They can send us an ad that is more likely to result in a purchase based on our previous behavior and personal information.
In economic terms, digital ads on social networks are cheaper and more efficient at producing results than ads in mass media aimed at mass audiences who might have no interest in the product. Newspapers, magazines, TV, and radio have lost enormous amounts of ad revenue to these disruptors.
Confusion sows distrust
Much has been written about disinformation campaigns by Russia and other actors to weaken democratic institutions by flooding social media with disinformation and conspiracy theories.
With so much disinformation overwhelming news consumers, they don’t know what to believe. They lose confidence in all institutions, including the press. Some decide not to vote. “What good is it. Everybody’s lying,” they conclude.
Related: News publishers develop playbook against government attacks
So how should this be controlled? my interviewer asked. It’s impossible to control or regulate, I said. You have to offer an alternative, namely trustworthy information. People want reliable, accurate information about issues that affect their daily lives.
Create trust through transparency
Part of the problem with misinformation is the fault of news organizations themselves. They have arrogantly assumed that the public understands that they are a valuable pillar of democracy–The Fourth Estate.
But the news media, which demand transparency from politicians and business people, have not been very transparent themselves: not about their ownership, ethical values, editorial personnel, research methods, or sources.
They also have not been very responsive to public criticism. Several new rating systems have emerged that give individual media and journalists a trust rating. Part of that rating depends on swift corrections of errors and explanations of how they occurred. The idea is to help consumers identify sources they can rely on.
In addition to those three for-profit ratings above is the nonprofit initiative the Trust Project. It is an international consortium of about 120 news organizations whose goal is to earn greater trust for their work by complying with eight standards of transparency and accountability. The standards include who funds a site, best practices of news gathering, transparency of news sources, and response to feedback.
Reasons for hope
It is encouraging to see the growth of partnerships that cross borders and bring together news organizations, civil society, politicians, regulators, academia, and private philanthropy, among others, I told my interviewer.
Global hoaxes and conspiracy theories require global efforts to counteract them. At the moment, trust is trying to catch up with misinformation, but the gap is closing.
Great article, bro.